Stop Fighting!
The Election of 2008 has been in full swing for a good year or so now, if not more. And I consider myself a pretty devoted follower of this election. I have observed all the candidates, and I have become extremely disappointed with each one, Republican and Democrat. For too long now, the candidates have been fighting, slinging mud and make personal attacks. It seems like John Edwards and Barack Obama's favorite phrase in the English language is, "Senator Clinton." Rudy Giuliani has made absurd attacks against our own senator, questioning his foreign policy experience. Mike Huckabee has harshly attacked Mitt Romney on the issue of immigration.
What do this all have in common? This is cheapening our system, big time. These candidates wonder why more people don't support them; it's because you are so damn negative. It the Democrats want to win this election, then they must stop all the bickering. It's time for this election to be about two competing philosophies for the future of this country. This is not about who can out do who in attacks. It's about the PEOPLE and the ISSUES of our great country. Stop the neagative ads and the attacks. Stop cheapening our system and turning people away from politics. Stop making me puke during the debates. This will ruin our system, because less and less people will vote if this continues. We must bring in new voters and get young people excited about politics again. If this continues, that will be a distant dream. STOP FIGHTING.
What do this all have in common? This is cheapening our system, big time. These candidates wonder why more people don't support them; it's because you are so damn negative. It the Democrats want to win this election, then they must stop all the bickering. It's time for this election to be about two competing philosophies for the future of this country. This is not about who can out do who in attacks. It's about the PEOPLE and the ISSUES of our great country. Stop the neagative ads and the attacks. Stop cheapening our system and turning people away from politics. Stop making me puke during the debates. This will ruin our system, because less and less people will vote if this continues. We must bring in new voters and get young people excited about politics again. If this continues, that will be a distant dream. STOP FIGHTING.
Labels: Election 2008
8 Comments:
read, i'm going to disagree with your proposition that the democrats have been attacking each other personally. The Democratic debate last thursday (for the first twenty minutes or so) was actually a debate, not a joint press conference. show me one thing edwards or obama said that was a "PERSONAL attack" and not an attack on her positions.
saying that Hillary is parsing words is not a personal attack; they aren't saying that Hillary is a bad mother, or is a sleeping around with other men. They are simply saying that she has been changing her positions...which is arguable, and if true, needs to be mentioned.
these aren't negative attacks, these are substantive discussions...and if we can't debate without challenging the other person, than we have seriously limited our ability to choose the best nominee.
Hell, even Howard Dean agrees.
I wrote this post in response to the last couple of debates and some of the stuff the Edwards camp has been sending me. It seems like Edwards, maybe not so much Obama, has been talking about Hillary Clinton more then themselves. What I am saying is that I believe the candidates should spend less time ripping Hillary apart and more time, coming up with some substance. I want to see more from Edwards and more from Obama. I think that these negative attacks have cheapened our system and turned people away. We need to have a more positive outlook.
I am sure, if you watch C-SPAN coverage of any Edwards or Obama rally, 95% of it is about them or Bush...
The main reason that Obama and Edwards have resorted to attacking Hillary, is because it is the only way they can get news. The MSM is only covering Hillary, and attacking her positions is the only way for Obama and Edwards to get in the news. Plus, Edwards and Obama presented their plans long ago (way before Hillary), and the media is tired of reporting about them, so when they get news now it is just the 5% of the time that they attack Hillary, making it appear that that is all they do - this is what comes with being the frontrunner...and it is good for her to get a little beating from her opponents, it will show that she can stand up to attacks... because if she is the nominee, there are sure to be plenty from the Republicans.
I do believe Hillary has been good in her response to these attacks. I don't doubt for a minute that she can't take the attacks she will get WHEN not IF she is the nominee. I just think that the attacks in the next to last debate was absurd, it got a little out of hand, especially when Edwards said that he didn't think Hillary was corrupt but she defended a corrupt system. Which is politics speak for "she is corrupt." And this was coming from a guy like Edwards who has done a 360 since the 04 election when he was a happy moderate. Now is the angry liberal. I just think that his attacks sometimes not all the time, are unwarranted. In addition to this, I am disappointed in Obama, because his campaign seemed different, because it was positive, but now he is attacking Senator Clinton (no matter how whimpy it is). I feel that Hillary skin is tough and she'll get through. What I guess I am trying to say is that the people who are turned away from the process only do see the negative attacks because lets face it Tim, you an me are the ONLY ones who actually watch "Road to the White House" on C-SPAN. Most people watch the 11 o'clock news and see the headline "Edwards Call Hillary 'The Devil in a Pants Suit'" I am worried that less people will be inclined to join the debate if this is what they see. Less people will get involved, and we will be stuck with worse candidates. I want our democracy to mean something to everyone again, and for people to get involved. People are statistically turned off by negative ads and the politics of attacks. I want to improve our system, not just stick by the "Karl Rove" vision of politics, where attacks work because I am going to say they work. If you say something about someone enough, they will start to believe it. That cheapens our system. It lowers the level of our debate when we see the only sound bites of the campaign being against someone else. I don't want Democrats to be different from the Republicans. Just because the system has always been generated by attacks doesn't make it right. And for anyone who doesn't think our system has been cheapened look at the voter totals in this country. Only 1/3 of our nation choses the president. People feel left behind by gov't and we need to change that as a party and bitchin' about the other person in the race all the time won't achieve that. Let's grow a pair and use 'em.
so read, your beef is with the media, not Edwards or Obama. you say that "bitchin' about the other person in the race all the time won't achieve that," but neither Obama nor Edwards are doing that. Edwards hasn't called her a "devil" and if he has, then i would agree with your analysis, but he hasn't.
AP GOV - People aren't turned off by negative ads, they just say that they are in a poll because they think that is the "right" answer.
I'm not doubting that Hillary can take attacks, and turn them around, But its good for dem voters to get a little taste of it since it is going to happen... a lot...
You attack Edwards for changing from a moderate to a liberal, but Read...come on...you switched from a moderate to a liberal in the same amount of time. young or old, peoples' opinions change - as evidenced by Hillary, who was a fire-breathing liberal in the '90s and has changed to a moderate while in the Senate.
I completely agree that politics is best when it is positive and substantive, but it can also include candidates challenging each other on the merits of their arguments (which is what Obama and Edwards are doing)...the two types of campaign tactics aren't mutually exclusive.
Like her or hate her (and i like Hill), but she does defend and represent a system which is corrupt. She represents those who voted for the Iranian resolution, she represents lobbyists, she represents the partisanship of the '90s. I buy into some of her arguments as to why she represents some of those things (like lobbyists), but you can't deny that she does represent that system - and in the eyes of many, that system is corrupt.
You dislike blind patriotism, but this is just becoming blind loyalty to a candidate.
When I said "Devil in a Pants Suit" I was making what appears to be a terrible joke. Of course I know Edwards hasn't called Hillary a "Devil." And to the accusation of blind loyalty, the reason I use Hillary as an example is that she is the victim of the vast majority of the attacks of this campaign. And I will not deny it, I love Hillary, just look above. I think that Edwards and Obama have made attacks that are warranted sometimes. And in addition, I would seriously doubt that the several studies done on this issue are not warranted because of the point you made in reference to AP Gov. I made this point about stats from a recent study produced by Carnegie-Mellon University. But, if anything, I am concerned that we are fostering a system of politics where it is simply cut-throat above anything. I think if we ran more positive campaigns then more issues could be covered. For example in 2004, there were several issues that were over taken by the absurd attacks of that campaign.
I won't deny that Hillary is flawed, and John Edwards might not always be wrong BUT I do not, as a proud Democrat, what our party to look divided this early on. I want people to look at the candidates for who they are, what their plans entail, and where they have been and where they are going. I think if attack politics were gone, nobody would miss them.
This early on? The primary will be decided in a few short months. There is no other time for DEMs to clarify their strengths, their weaknesses and their differences.
Sorry to burst your bubble on Hilary! I liked her so much 6 years ago I named my scottie dog, Hilary Clinton. Since then I actually studied her and educated myself on how she has voted on issues of war and peace. She voted for the War in Iraq, (knowing from Bill's tenure) that our own Weapons Inspectors reported he had no WMD! She has voted more times than not for a continuation of the war, rather than confront the truth that led to war. That was a political move, and 3900 have died because of it.
She has not stopped the erosion of our civil liberities, voted for the Patriot Act, supported that horrible Joe Leiberman and Bush on "calling the Iranian guard--a terrorist organization! Obama, Biden and Dodd voted against it. They learned the lesson with Bush, give him an inch and he declares war. When Clinton was President the american people, got NAFTA, CAFTA an we working people got the Shafta. She said, "she will expand Nafta"! So the rest of our jobs can go overseas!
This is a race between democrats for the nomination. Edwards, Obama et al have every right to go after her on "her record". When you analyze her record she is a failure.
Corporate media especially Fox Fake News want her to the nominee. They are waiting in the wings to lower the boom on everything else they know about her...but they are waiting. Who do they most fear...John Edwards. He has no baggage, he apologized for his mistake on the War with Iran. He will end Nafta, Cafta which is not only displacing american workers but because of Cafta driving the workers in mexico and south america to come to America.
If Hillary can not take the heat from fellow democrats, how can she take the heat from the Chinese, N, Korea, Iran etc?
Joe Biden is becoming more presidential every day. Although in the background majority of the democrats (except) Hillary would make him Sec. of State. Hillary won't. I have worked my whole adult life to see a woman president....but not this woman. This woman will give the next election to the republicans. and even if she does win the nomination, and presidency, do we really want to hear "a redux of the Clintons scandals"! Her candidacy will not heal the nation, it will further divide us. We need new people, without baggage, who have no axe to grind, who can start fresh! I love Obama but this rascist country will never elect a black man, before a white woman. That leaves Edwards.
I hear women say, I want Hilary cuz I want to see a woman in the white house. Great, but if that womans health care plan is a republican plan, if her views on Iran are warlike, if she cannot unite us....she will divide us further, thats why I will do all in my power to work against her, and work someone I believe can and will win...after all he already won the popular vote once!
PS. The IAEA just came out with their Iran report....they are years away from it...so lets stop the rush to war with Iran over more bush lies and deceptions and actually listen to that international body.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home